[ddots-l] Re: question about monitoring
- From: "Omar Binno" <omarbinno@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: <ddots-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2009 06:45:33 -0500
Thanks alot for the detailed explanation, Tim. So while I had everything
plugged into my mixer and not turning on input echo in sonar, the routing was
taking place through the audio interface/mixer, and not through Sonar? But if
that is the case, how come I could still hear effects if I inserted them on an
audio track when playing the project?
Thanks.
Omar Binno
AIM: LOD1116
Skype: obinno1
Website: www.omarbinno.com
----- Original Message -----
From: Tim Burgess
To: ddots-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Thursday, January 22, 2009 4:07 AM
Subject: [ddots-l] Re: question about monitoring
Hi Omar,
OK, here's the deal:
1 - Monitoring via the interface (known as hardware monitoring) means that
you hear a copy of the signal that's coming into the interface from a mic,
guitar, or whatever, without it being processed by your software. The
advantage of this is that there's no appreciable delay between what you hear
yourself playing/singing and what comes back at you from the speakers/cans.
The disadvantage is that you won't hear any FX processing that your DAW
software is adding to the sound (a lot of singers like to ha a bit of reverb
while they're recording and guitarists often don't find it easy to play
their part "dry");
2 - Software monitoring (like input echo in Sonar) allows you to hear the
treated signal, so the guitarist can hear that monster noise from Amplitube
and the singer can float away into the space created by a reverb plug-in.
This can sometimes help the creative process, but very often introduces a
small lag (called latency). On a fast machine with a high-quality interface
and good drivers it should be possible to reduce this delay to a point where
nobody notices or, even if you can hear it, it's so small that nobody cares.
However, if you can't reduce it to this level, for whatever reason, it can
make tracking very difficult as it starts to affect your timing.
So, there's no right or wrong (as usual), it's just a case of finding what's
appropriate for the instrument/artist you're dealing with and trying to tune
your software to provide the necessary. Hope that helps.
Best wishes.
Tim Burgess
Raised Bar Ltd
Phone: +44 (0)1827 719822
Don't forget to vote for improved access to music and music technology at
http://www.raisedbar.net/petition.htm
-----Original Message-----
From: ddots-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ddots-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of Omar Binno
Sent: 22 January 2009 07:49
To: ddots-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [ddots-l] question about monitoring
Okay, this is a very rudimentary question. Until now, my studio setup has
included using a mixer and an audio interface with sonar. However, I'm now
switching to just using an audio interface as a stand-alone, without a
mixer. I will be using the RME Fireface 800. The question now arises: should
I do my input monitoring through sonar, or through the audio interface. My
knowledge is rather foggy as to exactly what monitoring is used for. So
first, what is monitoring, and second, when using an audio interface without
a mixer, is it preferable to do the monitoring through the interface, or
through sonar.
Thank you for any and all input.
Omar Binno
AIM: LOD1116
Skype: obinno1
Website: www.omarbinno.com
PLEASE READ THIS FOOTER AT LEAST ONCE!
To leave the list, click on the immediately following link:
ddots-l-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe
If this link doesn't work then send a message to:
ddots-l-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
and in the Subject line type
unsubscribe
For other list commands such as vacation mode,
click on the immediately following link:
ddots-l-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=faq or
send a message, to
ddots-l-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
and in the Subject line type
faq
Other related posts:
